Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 7064821" data-attributes="member: 6696971">Here is the rub though.  The reason why GM as Storyteller and GM as Referee push toward being mutually exclusive is very simple.One's apex priority is about fidelity to GM-preferred outcomes and/or the exhibition of setting/prepared material. To that end, the (typically covert) manipulation of play (action-blocking, not honoring/upturning fictional results earned, resolution mechanic subordinating, resolution mechanic result fudging) toward those preferred outcomes and/or toward the exhibition of that setting/prepared material is wholly legitimate.The other's apex priority is about constructing scenarios that present tactically and strategically engaging decision-points, knowing the rules and impartially applying them as you fairly run the challenges within those scenarios, and ultimately letting the players sink or swim by virtue of their (un)skilled play.  The concept of "preferred outcomes" and the massaging/manipulating of play toward those outcomes is anathema.They don't play nice with each other.  At all.So you can be a Storyteller GM with a veneer of Referee, but you can't truly claim the virtues of both simultaneously.Now, if you don't have preferred outcomes/metaplot/setting or prepared material that you massage/manipulate play toward (typically by way of the techniques in my parenthetical above), then you're not a Storyteller GM.</blockquote>